Page 81: of Offshore Engineer Magazine (Apr/May 2014)

80 82

Gulf of Mexico 4 steps to de-risking in one or more aspects of the mainte- supplier are allowed to analyze and nance “ladder” that extends from con- integrate all tasks into a coordinated plan

O&M practices struction, hookup and commissioning to that incorporates contingencies. To help operations, shutdowns and turnarounds. overcome owner/operator reluctance,

Today, even relocation and decommis- Stork is introducing an innovative O&M sioning activities are handled by highly Supply Chain Lab process to allow asset

O&M specialized ? rms with the skills, equip- owners/operators and Stork O&M project workshop ment and processes in place to manage managers to jointly set project objectives complex projects. and KPIs. The process includes a work-

O&M outsourcing over the lifecycle of shop led by a neutral facilitator whose oil and gas assets was reviewed in a Gulf agenda is to streamline O&M processes

Coast research study. A key ? nding was and focus on safety compliance, hazard the desirability of an unbroken chain of awareness, and risk mitigation.

accountability—from the work scope and To be successful, the workshop must project goals outlined by the asset owner bring together four key stakeholder posi-

Value to the supervisors and crews of contrac- tions from each side—the asset manager, proposition tors doing the work. It was clear from the and O&M, HSE and procurement rep- alignment study that reducing the number of main- resentatives. On the Stork side are the tenance service providers to less than a area manager, an O&M project manager, handful makes managing accountability and HSE and commercial representa- much easier. Working with fewer players tives. During the workshop, participants ensures safer, more ef? cient and easier- identify speci? c risk-reducing and to-manage operations. When signi? cant cost-saving activities that the technical risk reduction, reduced personnel on services specialist can provide—activi- board and lower O&M costs are the end ties that most general contractors cannot

O&M game, it makes sense to have one techni- offer. Both sides— the owner/operator service cal services supplier rather than many and Stork stakeholders—formulate a package suppliers. The practice of dividing O&M speci? c value proposition that exam- among multiple suppliers can be more ines how operating expenses will be challenging and costly because each sup- reduced while ef? ciency and safety are plier has a limited work scope and lacks improved. an understanding of the big picture. From An example of such a value proposition a safety and ef? ciency standpoint, using comes from the cost savings that result fewer technical service providers gives from Stork’s ability to combine ? eld project better results. managers and technicians with multiple

KPI

GOM operators can bene? t from les- skills. For instance, many Stork team monitoring sons learned from other offshore basins members have not only task-related main- where operators have been employing tenance skills—such as hot bolt clamping the “fewer supplier/higher chain of and flange integrity management and accountability” philosophy for years.

The best results come from partnering relationships where many O&M func- tions are given to a single provider who takes responsibility for improving safety, reducing downtime and lowering operat- ing costs. Partnering relationships also facilitate ? exible “bonus/malus” (reward/ penalty) commercial models based on key performance indicators (KPIs). These performance gainshare models can be successfully applied in turnkey projects as long as there is excellent alignment between an asset owner/operator’s staff and the technical service provider.

Some asset owners/operators are not accustomed to giving contractors

Multi-skilled workers can apply hot work, such as access to the information necessary to metal-to-metal bonding for pipe and structural design and implement an effective O&M sections, in di